President. – The next item is the debate on the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the Association Agreements/Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine.

Johannes Hahn,Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.– Madam President, I am grateful, on behalf of the High Representative, for this opportunity to take stock of where we are concerning the Association Agreement and the implementation, as approved a year ago in this House, with Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova.

For Ukraine, the DCFTA can bring significant economic benefits. Ukrainian businesses will now receive stable and predictable preferential access to the largest market in the world, with 500 million customers, and EU enterprises will be able to benefit from easier access to the Ukrainian market, so we must help Ukraine develop the right conditions to encourage new business and investment relationships. Over 20 meetings were held in trilateral format to address alleged Russian concerns about the DCFTA implementation. Now Ukraine faces a number of measures imposed by Russia impeding trade and transit and will need our support here too.

In 2016 we will be stepping up our efforts to support Ukraine with more coordination with EU Member States and greater visibility for our work. Particularly on the implementation of the DCFTA, we will build on current support programmes to improve the business climate, provide support to small and medium-sized enterprises, and help Ukraine find new markets. Ukraine needs to show it is open for business by aligning with EU standards in key sectors and taking decisive action on the rule of law. The Support Group for Ukraine is playing a key role with the Commission in all these areas.

Despite very challenging circumstances, the Ukrainian Government has made progress in implementing the Association Agreement. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the new national police force have started to work. The selection process for an anti-corruption prosecutor has been completed. The government has also adopted a law on the natural gas market, which aims at bringing the gas sector of Ukraine into line with the EU Third Energy Package.

These developments were welcomed at the second Association Council in Brussels which was held on 7 December, but we should not underestimate the challenges ahead. The fight against corruption, reform of the judiciary and the public administration, as well as amendments to the constitution, particularly the second reading on decentralisation, will require courage and political will.

Shortly before Christmas, we published our final report on Ukraine’s implementation of the visa liberalisation action plan which concluded that, since the necessary process has been made and the number of additional commitments undertaken by the Ukrainian leadership, a positive recommendation for visa-free travel could be made. We aim to present a legislative proposal to pave the way for visa liberalisation with Ukraine soon.

Turning to Moldova, the country has made great strides in concluding and implementing the Association Agreement and DCFTA with the European Union. Since 1 January the region of Transnistria also has the possibility to trade preferentially under the DCFTA, making an important contribution to our conflict resolutions, but recent Moldovan governments have not implemented important reforms. We are currently witnessing a highly unstable political situation, which is also an obstacle to the effective implementation of the Association Agreement and making full use of opportunities.

The country is in great need of stable leadership, with the determination and energy required to address a number of problematic issues, including high-level corruption. This is necessary before Moldova can proceed with other key reforms, in particular in the justice, financial and media sectors and the reform of the public administration. I have just received information that there was a positive vote on the new government and I hope this is now a stable one. I think we should support any government that is ready to undertake the necessary reforms, and it is also important to provide the necessary substantial support in terms of staff, human resources, but also, if needed, and this is definitely the case, in terms of money, provided that there is a positive assessment by the IMF.

Finally, as regards Georgia, impressive efforts have been made to implement the Association Agreement and the results are already visible, with strong growth in foreign direct investment. Other indicators also show promising signs. The visa liberalisation action plan has proven to be an effective tool for promoting a range of reforms, but Georgia has gone beyond the action plan benchmarks and taken further steps to reform the judiciary as well as the Prosecutor’s Office. In this regard, we also closely monitor the authorities to ensure that there is no unlawful conduct targeting the constitutional court and its personnel. The result was our positive report last December and with Georgia, too, we will press ahead now with legislation to achieve full visa liberation as soon as possible.

In summary, we can be happy that we have already come so far with our three Association Agreement partners, but we still have a long way to go and no room at all for complacency. I look forward to hearing the honourable Members’ views during this debate today.

Johannes Cornelis van Baalen, on behalf of the ALDE Group.– Madam President, the European Union needs stable neighbours, but also a democratic Russia would need stable neighbours. The Russians do of course the opposite: they destabilise. It is in the interests of all that we talk with the three countries we mentioned to help them, to assist them, and the agreements we speak about are vital in this respect.

A stable economy, economic growth, the re-establishment of the rule of law, the fight against corruption – and we should, of course, financially support them, and we do, but every euro spent should be accounted for. This would mean that in a few years’ time these countries will be able to export stability and not only consume stability. I have visited the three countries also on a party-to-party basis and I am positive about the results we are seeing there. Much must be done, can be done and should be done.

I think that my colleagues in this Parliament who have worked together with the parties in Moldova to form a new government, have done a great deal. We should thank them for that, and all the Association Agreements should be ratified, including the Association Agreement with Ukraine.

Johannes Cornelis van Baalen (ALDE), blue-card answer.– The people who know my position in Dutch politics know that I do not think that referenda are the right way to make decisions, because normally in a referendum it is not about the issue, it is about whether you like the government or not. The Dutch Government should look at the results of the referendum, and it has its own responsibility. I hope that the government will take its own responsibility. Of course, in the meantime we will fight for the fact that we want to convince our citizens to vote ‘yes’.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))

Tim Aker (EFDD), blue-card question.– You talk about wanting a democratic Russia, which is very honourable, but surely this Union should get its own house in order. How can we lecture the Russians when this Union ignored the constitution votes in France and the Netherlands and ignored the Lisbon Treaty votes in Ireland? Surely this place should get its own house in order before lecturing anyone else.

Johannes Cornelis van Baalen (ALDE), blue-card answer.– There are no Dutch soldiers on foreign soil in the European Union, not in your country or other countries. So it is Russia which has to explain and has to account for what it did and does, and a democratic Russia – we hope that the country becomes democratic – that is good for Russia and for the Russians. That is an ideal, but they have to do it themselves, there I agree with you, but we may help them.

Heidi Hautala, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group.– Madam President, the association agreements are very powerful tools to ensure that these three countries go through the necessary reforms that will result in the rule of law, democracy and respect of fundamental freedoms and human rights, and we have already seen that all three are struggling to go through those processes. It is not very easy, and we have to give them all the support we can. That is why I believe we have to show them that parliamentary oversight of these processes is important. We can also show them how the best practices of our EU Member States have given Parliament a real say on EU integration processes and the transposition of EU legislation. That is what we are trying to do in the European Parliament right now. We can, perhaps, conclude that this parliamentary support has so far been the strongest in Ukraine, and perhaps we can learn from that and adopt the same kind of means and procedures for Moldova and Georgia.

I believe that to go through the necessary reforms of the justice sector, media freedoms, etc., is the best guarantor of independence and sovereignty for these countries, and we all know that Russia casts a very long shadow over all three. We also need to make sure that there is a full monitoring of the reforms, that they are not just for show, and there I believe that the EU could do even better.

Concerning the forthcoming referendum in the Netherlands, we should take note of it. We should hope that the Dutch people are fully aware that this is about Ukraine’s place in the geopolitical landscape – whether it will have the right to join Europe as it wishes, or whether it will be left at the mercy of Russia.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))

Bill Etheridge (EFDD), blue-card question.– I notice in your speech you speak about respecting independence and sovereignty of the countries we are discussing, but then you talk about association with the European Union, which even its fondest supporters say is about pooling independence and sovereignty, and those of us who dislike it say it is about giving it up altogether. So there is a complete contradiction there in what you are suggesting. Are you saying that I should jump out of the frying pan of the Russian control into the fire of the EU?

Heidi Hautala (Verts/ALE), blue-card answer.– Thank you very much for this interesting question. I really believe that the independence today means that we can also pool our forces across national borders, but we are doing it in a voluntary way in the European Union. I think it is absolutely incorrect that you make this comparison between what used to be the Soviet Union and what is the European Union today.

Sajjad Karim (ECR).– Madam President, may I firstly welcome the commitment shown by Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine to their association agreements and the DCFTAs with the European Union. As a co-Chair of the EU-Georgia Parliamentary Association Committee, I would like to particularly highlight the added value of the Association Agreement and the DCFTA to Georgia’s reform processes. Already we are seeing the early results of these agreements, with Georgia having a good pace of approximation of Georgian legislation to EU standards. The latest trade statistics show that EU imports from Georgia have risen by 15% despite negative economic trends in the region. I would also like to congratulate Georgia on the progress made in all areas covered by the visa liberalisation action plan, as confirmed by the Commission in December; with Georgia on its own merits now meeting all the requirements for visa-free travel, we therefore swiftly expect as co-legislators that the European Commission will submit to us the legislative proposal needed so that we can demonstrate our commitment to Georgia.

Petras Auštrevičius (ALDE).– Madam President, how could it be that the association agreements, which aim to promote peace, stability and prosperity, can be against someone’s interests? Those who sit in the Kremlin say exactly this: it is against Russia. Why is this so? For one basic reason: the rule of law and democracy next door is so much in contrast to what is happening in Russia today. The choice for Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine is this: either Europeanisation or being embraced by ‘Russkiy Mir’.

In this context, I wish to stress the following. I call on the Georgian Government to cherish freedom of the media and fully respect the independence of the constitutional and other courts. I urge the new Moldovan Government, appointed just two hours ago, not to waste time in tackling reforms that are so long—awaited, and I remind the Ukrainian Government of the ideals of the Maidan and I call on them finally to start cutting the heads of the beast named corruption.

Mike Hookem (EFDD).– Madam President, during a recent trip to Ukraine I discovered that, despite two revolutions, the democracy people crave is still elusive and the old establishment still clings to power. This situation creates three major problems. Firstly, the greatest obstacle to democracy is corruption. This is endemic and seems to blight from what I saw and the people I spoke to, all levels of the political and judicial system. Secondly, there is the problem of political prisoners held as scapegoats for systemic failure. Finally, there are the Ukrainian people who continue to feel let down, disenfranchised and ignored by the political elite. But with rampant inflation, falling pensions, an average wage of only USD 200 a month and soaring energy prices eating into their salary, who can blame them?

It therefore beggars belief that, due to its obsessive, expansionist policies and empire—building, the EU continues to betray the ideas of the Maidan Revolution by propping up a corrupt and uncaring government with nearly EUR 2 billion in loans. The fact is, despite protestations to the contrary from officials desperate to expand the EU’s influence ever further east – particularly in one of the most oil- and gas-rich territories in the world – what the people of the Ukraine crave is independent democracy. Instead, they have been offered the new form of dictatorship which the EU represents.

Richard Howitt (S&D).– Madam President, after the setbacks of the Riga Summit, tonight there are glimmers of hope that the prospects for the Eastern Partnership are being rekindled with the completion of the ratification of Georgia’s Association Agreement by all 28 Member States last month and the free trade deal with Ukraine officially coming into effect at the start of the year. The Minsk agreement may have been questioned, but it has not been destroyed and, alongside the efforts the Commissioner referred to on Transnistria, we should welcome political developments in Moldova this very day, which look to have brought a political crisis to an end.

However, it is clear in Moldova, and in Ukraine in particular, that it is necessary for the EU to undertake deep engagement in order to strengthen Europe-facing movements in these countries. I do hope that the country which suffered most from the MH17 disaster will support political progress in Ukraine, which could help prevent such terrible events from happening again. On Georgia, selective justice and corruption are problems in all the countries of the neighbourhood, not one country. The EPP should not engage in selective politics, but support Georgia’s aspirations too.

Finally, regarding our neighbours’ neighbours, once again I place on record that my group supports the Commission’s tentative work on studying possibilities for relations between the European Union and the Eurasian Union. And we support political dialogue with Moscow, but not to bargain over sovereign countries or to weaken our approach on sanctions. Socialists and Democrats do not deny or underestimate different perspectives, but we do want to make genuine attempts to bridge them.

Tatjana Ždanoka (Verts/ALE).– Madam President, if we compare the resolutions submitted by different political groups as well as today’s interventions on the issue, it seems that we are speaking of completely different Georgias, Moldovas and Ukraines. How is it possible? My answer is blind eyes, lies and double standards. Blind eyes on the irresponsibility of the governments of these countries supplied with oligarchs. Lies on prospects of future EU membership for these countries. The Dutch Prime Minister told us openly this morning that the Association Agreement is not a pre-accession. For the European Union this is like being a man using a woman sexually without promising to marry her. Double standards – why are Nadia Savchenko and Oleg Sentsov the only persons in detention to be cared about? Why is there a silence of prisoners of conscience in Ukraine and Moldova, such as Grigory Petrenko and Ruslan Kotsaba?

Sandra Kalniete (PPE).– Madam President, I would like to speak about the EU-Ukraine Agreement. Its entry into force was postponed until 1 January 2016 due to Russian objections. It is an irony of history that now its future is challenged not by Mr Putin but by Dutch citizens.

However, I want to believe that one of the world’s most advanced nations, among the first in Europe to embrace modern freedoms, a trade and technology powerhouse and leader on human rights, will support the freedom aspirations of another European nation and will let the freedom of trade and human exchange advance in the relations between the European Union and Ukraine.

We should never forget that the EU shares over 1 300 kilometres of border with Ukraine. That is why a secure and prosperous Ukraine is in our own strategic interests. Stability and trade across this border means more secure borders for the Union. Ukraine is an important trade partner for the European Union. It is the largest European country, with fairly well developed industrial, agricultural and technology sectors. The agreement allows European businesses free access to this huge market. We have to be aware that a Ukraine closely associated with the EU is the best safeguard against the revisionist powers who want to redraw European borders.

Tim Aker (EFDD).– Madam President, on a point of order, can you explain under what rule under the Rules of Procedure you as the Chair are allowed to give editorial comment on the previous speaker’s speech? As the President, and what one would assume is a neutral Chair, what rules give you the right to give editorial comment on what any Member of this House says? Can you explain the rules that give you that power, please?

David Martin (S&D).– Madam President, I want to start by saying that I fully welcome the agreement between Ukraine and the European Union and despite what we have heard from the other side of the House, we need to keep stressing that this is an agreement between two sovereign trading partners. No one has forced this agreement on Ukraine. No one has forced this agreement on the European Union. We have come to it voluntarily and the aim is to improve trade and investment between our two groups, and also to ensure that the living standards of the people of Ukraine are improved as a result of this agreement.

Can it succeed? Well it is early days but I think that if we look at the agreements with Georgia and Moldova, we can see that we have a good starting point. Trade between those two countries and the European Union has increased significantly since the comprehensive trade agreements came into being. Of course, that is of itself not enough and we have to do more to make sure that ordinary citizens of Georgia and Moldova benefit from the trade agreements, that living standards are improved in their country.

Likewise with Ukraine. Our partnership there gives us the opportunity to start working with our Ukrainian friends, to tackle corruption, which is a serious problem in that country, to improve the price of energy available to ordinary citizens, which has gone up as a result of changes there. We need to make sure that energy poverty does not exist in that country.

Finally, let me say that although it is for the Dutch people to decide what they do in their referendum, I hope they will not give a free gift to the Russians who have tried to divide this continent and have also done that partly by financing some of the right-wing Putin friends we have on the other side of this Chamber.

Andrejs Mamikins (S&D).– Madam President, the last decade has undoubtedly proven difficult for Georgia. The August 2008 war severely worsened relations with Russia and these have only recently started to recover from economic difficulties. Yet despite all this Georgians have achieved the almost impossible: numerous successful reforms, especially of the judiciary, the strengthening of democracy, economic development – all of which contributed to the eventual conclusion of the EU-Georgia Association Agreement and will soon result in the finalisation of the visa liberalisation dialogue.

The fact that some of my colleagues regularly criticise Georgia, often on issues which have actually long been resolved, is most regrettable. The same applies for our resolutions, colleagues. What in the world has happened to quality writing? We purport to be the citadel of democracy, yet whom are we trying to lecture here? Georgia, which is the cradle of European civilisation, with its millennia-old traditions and statehood? If we really are who we purport to be, a standard of proper conduct has to be upheld in everything we do here in Parliament.

Andi Cristea (S&D).– Madam President, by signing the Association Agreements, Moldova, Ukraine and Georgia have chosen a path of close political association and economic integration with the EU. As Chair of the EU-Moldova PAC, I see the value and political significance of this resolution, not only in the implementation assessment, but especially in its clear message on the way ahead.

Moldova has gone through an unprecedented political period since the last general election. The new prime minister and his parliamentary majority have the unique opportunity and responsibility to finally provide the country with a stable and predictable political process. Such an environment is a precondition for any thorough reform ambition conducive to genuine and profound progress.

By conforming to the European path and implementing the association agenda, I am certain that the country’s pressing issues will finally be addressed – but the most difficult political effort for the incoming executive will be that of regaining the citizens’ trust.

Eduard Kukan (PPE).– Madam President, Association Agreements (AA) and the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas (DCFTA) are one of the most advanced tools we have at our disposal to promote closer cooperation with our neighbours. In the case of Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, we made an important political choice to strengthen our ties and bring them closer to the EU. These agreements were partly a response to the aspirations of those countries and their citizens to put their relations with the EU on a higher level.

In the situation in which the countries are juggling different internal reforms and external pressures, the AAs and DCFTAs should stimulate reform processes and economic growth. We have to be supportive of the reforms, but also demanding, especially when it comes to consolidating democracy, eradicating corruption and strengthening the rule of law. These are the values which are associated with the EU. Delivering on them is a crucial test for our partners but also for the EU’s image and credibility in the neighbourhood.

Clare Moody (S&D).– Madam President, I am delighted this resolution welcomes the efforts that Georgia has made to implement the Association Agreement with its DCFTA. I also welcome the fact that, since this agreement, trade between the EU and Georgia has significantly increased. But this agreement is about far more than trade. It is about shared values and deepening our long-standing relationship. We need to support the work that has been done, and is being done, to develop a free and open political environment and to achieve social cohesion. The social dimension of these agreements is vital to building and maintaining the confidence of citizens in our shared values.

There is still work to be done, but without doubt, progress is being made, in particular through dialogue and reconciliation. Finally, I welcome the Commission’s progress report on the visa liberalisation action plan and look forward to the related legislative proposals and approval.

Gunnar Hökmark (PPE).– Madam President, it is very interesting to listen to the voices of Putin in this chamber, because this defines very much what this issue is about. They dislike and do not want to express respect for the territorial integrity of these countries. They do not want to support the independence and national sovereignty of these countries. They are against free trade and open markets and transparent energy trade. They are against visa liberalisation. They are against cooperation in the fight against corruption and bureaucracy and disrespect for the rule of law. They are defending the interests of Putin in Europe, and it is shameful.

It also reminds us what this is about: defending an open Europe, ensuring that European values are strong, and doing what we can in order to support the citizens of these countries.

Tim Aker (EFDD).– Madam President, thanks to UKIP, this year, or maybe next year, the United Kingdom will have its referendum on our membership of the European Union. But we are not alone.

This year, in April, the Netherlands will vote on its accession deal with the Ukraine, and my plea to Dutch patriots across the pond is: put a spanner in the works. Say ‘no’ to this institution; say ‘no’ to this Union that disrespects your democracy. It was not so long ago that you said ‘no’ to the European Constitution, but this place decided to ignore that, dump the constitution and rebrand it as the Lisbon Treaty.

A ‘no’ vote in the Netherlands means that the United Kingdom has a fillip going into its referendum. My plea to the British people watching this now is: ‘we are not alone’. Millions of people across this Union, across this continent, are sick and tired of this place, this institution. We yearn for our democracy back; we yearn for our borders to be returned and we yearn for the peoples of our nation states to be in control. We are public servants and it is time the people had the final say.

Johannes Hahn,Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.– Madam President, honourable Members, first and foremost I would like to thank you, Madam President, for your very clear statement concerning President Juncker.

On Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, these three partners have made a courageous choice to align themselves more closely with the European Union by undertaking ambitious and far-reaching reforms. They do this in the face of significant challenges coming both from within their countries and from the outside, and unlike some of their predecessors, they do this without the firm promise of EU membership at the end of the process. So we owe our partners our full and unwavering support as they travel on this road.

The EU will offer them support, whether it is financial, technical or political. We have every interest in ensuring that our partners succeed in these efforts, because their success will also be our success and their failure would be our failure. But ultimately, this process must be one that is owned by our partners and done because it is the right thing for them to do, not because we asked them to do it. This is the message which I gave clearly to the Ukrainian and Georgian Governments when I visited Kiev and Tbilisi last November, and I believe their actions demonstrate that they fully understand this.

On Moldova and the very recent events: the situation is tense, no doubt, and I appeal to everybody, to every party inside and outside the Parliament, to have a peaceful political debate and to refrain from any kind of violence. I can reassure you that the High Representative, Federica Mogherini, and myself are in permanent contact with our delegation on the ground to contribute to a peaceful solution of the situation and to help the country.

Having said that – and this is another example – political association and economic integration of our Eastern partners will be a marathon, not a sprint, and it will require the active and sustained support of this House. My colleagues and I will continue to keep you fully informed of developments in the coming months and years, and I thank you for this very lively debate.